{ "paper_id": "C80-1028", "header": { "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", "date_generated": "2023-01-19T13:05:14.844023Z" }, "title": "LEVELS OF REPRESENTATION IN NATURAI, LANGUAGE BASED INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND THEIR RELATION TO THE METHODOI,OGY OF COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS", "authors": [ { "first": "G", "middle": [], "last": "Zifonun", "suffix": "", "affiliation": { "laboratory": "", "institution": "FEDERAL REPUBI.IC GERMANY Summar L", "location": { "postCode": "D-6800", "settlement": "MANNHEIM" } }, "email": "" } ], "year": "", "venue": null, "identifiers": {}, "abstract": "In this paper the methodological basis of the 'computational linguistics approach' for representing the meaning of natural language sentences is investigated. Its adherance to principles of formal linguistics and formal philosophy of language like the 'separation of levels of syntactic and semantic analysis', and the \"Fregean\" principle may be contrasted with the 'artificial intelligence approach'. A \"Montague\" style method of mapping the syntax of natural language onto the syntax of the 'semantic language' used as the means of internal representation in the information system PLIDIS is presented. Rules for defining subsequent levels of representation like 'syntax-interpretative level', 'redundancy' free level' are given.", "pdf_parse": { "paper_id": "C80-1028", "_pdf_hash": "", "abstract": [ { "text": "In this paper the methodological basis of the 'computational linguistics approach' for representing the meaning of natural language sentences is investigated. Its adherance to principles of formal linguistics and formal philosophy of language like the 'separation of levels of syntactic and semantic analysis', and the \"Fregean\" principle may be contrasted with the 'artificial intelligence approach'. A \"Montague\" style method of mapping the syntax of natural language onto the syntax of the 'semantic language' used as the means of internal representation in the information system PLIDIS is presented. Rules for defining subsequent levels of representation like 'syntax-interpretative level', 'redundancy' free level' are given.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Abstract", "sec_num": null } ], "body_text": [ { "text": "The present paper presents ideas concerning a methodology of the 'semantics in computational linguistics' (COLsemantics).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "There is the following hypothesis underlying:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "In the field of COL-semantics algorithms and computer programs are developed which deliver structures of linguistic analysis and representation that can be compared with those of formal linguistic semantics and satisfy the adequacy criteria of certain linguistic theories. They therefore are suitable instruments for developing and testing such theories.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "COL-semantics hence proceeds in a way different from the semantic processing as it is found in the framework of artificial intelligence (AI-semantics). AI-semantics is not so much linked to the semantics of formal linguistics or logic but rather to cognitive psychology, problem solving theory and the theory of knowledge representation which has been recently put forward within AI itself. 1 Between both branches of semantic processing of natural language that are realized in computer systems there therefore exists a difference in aims, theories and methods.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Starting from a brief sketch ot the aims and theories of both approaches one essential methodological principle of COL-semantics will be elaborated in the second chapter of the paper. In the third chapter COL-semantic methods will be exemplified by a concrete application, the production of semantic representations in an information system. Stress will notbe laid on the question of w h a t a COLsemantic representation should look like but h o w levels of a semantic representation can be systematically relatedwith natural language and with each other.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Aims and theoretical concept__ E of COL-semantics and AI-semantics", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The difference of aims and methods can only be outlined here as far as it is relevant with respect to the methodologi-ca1 divergence which will be dealt with in detail:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Aim of AI-semantics is the simulation of the human language understanding and/or language generating process that is to be understood as a manifestation of intelligent human problem solving behaviour.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Aim of COL-semantics is the algorithmic generation of descriptive structures (of a generativ-semantic, interpretative, logico-semantic or other type) out of a given natural language input. Both purposes can be partial aims or intermediate steps within a larger project like 'simulation of dialogue behaviour', 'natural language information or question answering system'.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Thus the AI-approach leads to a theory where the object of explanation (or simulation) is \"rational human behaviour ''2 or more specifically human language behaviour as a rational psychic process, whereas in the theory of linguistic semantics language is being objectified as a generated structure or a system which can be considered independently from the associated mental processes. In linguistic semantics and also in COL-semantics meta-linguistic notions which refer to language as a system like 'synonymy', 'equivalence' and (particularly in the formal linguistics based on logic)'truth' and 'entailment' are crucial; in AI-semantics however we have the 'behaviour' oriented conce~ts of 'inferencing','disambiguating', \"reasoning', 'planning' etc o A methodological principle of COL-semantics A distinctive feature of linguistics, especially logico-linguistic theories, is the separation of different \"expression\" and \"content\" levels of analysis and representation and the speci-fication of mapping rules between them (surface structure versus deep structure, syntactic structure versus semantic structure). In Montague grammar this differentiation between a well defined syntactic level and an also well defined semantic level of description is a methodologically necessary consequence of the \"Fregean\" principle. The Fregean principle states that the meaning of an expression can be determined on the basis of the meanings of its logically simple constituent expressions and the syntactic structure of the whole expression. This principle has been revived by Montague and has ~eenrealized in his theory of language in such a way that the syntactic and the semantic structure of a natural language expression are respectively represented as expressions of formal systems (syntax and meaning algebras) between which systems there exist well defined formal relationships (homomorphisms).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [ { "start": 71, "end": 87, "text": "(or simulation)", "ref_id": null } ], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "When this concept is transferred to the operationalizing of linguistic analysis in a computer system it will be excluded to conceive the mapping from natural language into semantic representation as a simple integrated pass, where in the course of parsing a sentence the valid semantic interpretation is assigned to each occurring item or group of items and where the possibilities of inference and association with stored background knowledge are flocally f realized without ever generating a full syntactic analysis. Saving an explicit level of syntactic representation seems to be compatible with the Fregean principle only under the condition that the algorithm incorporates a grammar (in the technical sense of a consistent set of generating or accepting syntactic rules), but for reasons of optimization directly associates or applies semantic 'values' or 'rules' in processing the corresponding syntactic 'nodes' or 'rules '4, or even allows a semantic control of rule selection without leaving the parsing mode. This condition however is mostly not maintained in AI parsing approaches where the one step processing is understood as a cognitively adequate analogue of human linguistic information processing and where even the terminal and non terminal symbols of the \"grammar\" are interpreted as semantic categories.5", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Introduction", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The way of processing natural language according to the principles of COLsemantics shall be demonstrated by the linguistic component of a natural language information system. The description is oriented at the application area and the structure of the system PLIDIS (information system for controlling industrial water pollution, developed at the Institut fuer deutsche Sprache, Mannheim). 6 Giving only the over all structure of the system we have the following processings and levels: morphological analysis of natural language input ~ syntactic analysis (level of syntactic representation) ~ transduction into formal representation language (level of semantic representation) interpretation (evaluation) against the database ~ answer generation", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Syntactic and semantic representation in an information system", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The formal representation language is the language KS an extended first order predicate calculus, where the features going beyond predicate calculus are many sorted domain of individuals, lambdaabstraction and extended term building. 7 In the following two aspects of the semantic representation will be treated:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Syntactic and semantic representation in an information system", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "-the mapping between syntactically analyzed natural language expressions and their KS counterparts will be investigated -a differentiation between three levels of semantic representation will be accounted for: (level l) syntax-interpretative level, (level 2) canonical level, (level 3) database-related level, All three levels follow the same syntax, i.e. the syntax of KS and have the same compositional model theoretic semantics; they differ in their non logical constant symbols.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Syntactic and semantic representation in an information system", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "In analogy with Montague's \"theory of translation\" in \"Universal Grammar\"we assume that the syntactic structures of natural language (NL, here German) and the semantic language (here KS) are similar, i.e. there exists a translation function f, such that the following holds: By applying the function ~ we have got a grammar GKS for our semantic language KS in an inductive way. We now give the following lexical correspondence rules for some non logical expressions of NL, taken from the application area of PLIDIS. An important principle in COL-semantics is the notion of structural (not lexical) synonymy. The following intuitively valid synonymy postulates (meaning postulates) can be formulated. The application of this principle may be iterated.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "_Mapping_natural language into the kemantic representation l~i!g~age KS", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "(2 There are verb classes the elements of which have no descriptive meaning (\"non-content verbs\"), in German the so called \"Funktionsverben\", the copula segn and others). In such cases the NP as object or subject of the verb is the content bearer or 'principal' NP, e.e. it becomes the predicate of the proposition. Such a sentence is synonymous with a corresponding sentence containing a content verb equivalent in meaning to the content bearing NP. For example: In such a non-content verb proposition a noun phrase with a place holder attribute can also function as a \"second order\" principal NP, i.e. its unspecified attribute can be replaced by a \"filler\" NP, occurring as argument of the non-content verb:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Arsengehalt", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Arsengehalt liegt bei Lauxmann in der Probe vor. is synonymous with Die Probe bei Lauxmann enthZlt Arsen.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Both postulates shall be applied for transducing the level ] representations of NL sentences into level 2 representations. We first give a definition of 'principal term', i.e. the KS construction corresponding to a 'principal NP'. (Def.) A principal term in a formula containing as PRAED the translation of anon content verb is a term that is capable, according to its semantic and syntactic structure, to embed other argument terms o~ the translation of the non content verb as its arguments.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The operationalized version of the two principles is now after having shifted them onto the KS level:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "(1: maximality principle)When a NL-expression has n analysis (n ~ 2J in level ] which only differ in the number of arguments, then the level 2 representation consists of the 'maximal' level I expression, i.e. the expression containing the largest number of arguments. Any failing arguments are to be substituted by (existentially bound~ variables.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "(2: transformation principle) (2.1.) When the PRAED of a formula is the translation of a non-content verb, at least one of its arguments must be a principal term. (2.2.) A formula containing the translation of a non content verb must be transformed into an expression which contains the PRAED of a principal term as predicate iff there is an unambiguous mapping of the arguments of the translation of the non-content verb a) into arguments of a principal term or b) into a princapal term such that a well-formed formula of leve] 2 is obtained.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "We now state that PROBE and ENTHALT are 'maximal' expressions and PROBEI and ENTHALTI must be mapped into them respectively and that further holds: VORLIEG is the translation of the noncontent verb vorliegen", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "204--", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "is the PRAED of a second order principal term with respect to a 'plant' argument ENTHALT is the PRAED of a principal term with respect to a 'sample' argument Then the two examples of level I are mapped into a single representation on level 2:", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "PROBE", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "[ENTHALT[JOTA[LAMBDA x[PROBE G-L XJ]]AS1]", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "PROBE", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The reduction of synonymous structures in the canonical level of representation meets the criteria of economy as they are necessary in a computer system. II As we have tried to show, however,it can be based upon general linguistic principles and need not be imputed to the field of \"world semantics\". On the other side admitting paraphrases as natural language input (as our examples are) improves the systems \"cooperativeness\" towards the user. In PLIDIS special aspects of the world model are accounted for in the level 3 representations which mirror the relational structure of the data model to some extent. We can not go into the details of the relationship between level 2 and level 3 ~or reasons of space.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "PROBE", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Language processing systems that are oriented at Montague grammar or model theoretic semantics are being developed among others by Friedman et al., Sondheimer and the PHLIQAI group. A theoretical discussion of the relationship between model theoretic semantics and AIsemantics can be found in Gunji and Sondheimer cf. also Hobbs and Rosenschein St. Bien and Wilks (witha contrary vlew). The methodological ideas presented here are most closely related with the approach of multi-level semantics pursued in PHLIQAi. But unlike the PHLIQAi approach we regard the level(sJ of linguistic representation not only under the more formal aspect of syntax interpretation but, as the last chapters show, we also take into account aspects of semantics of natural language word classes and structural synonymy.", "cite_spans": [ { "start": 293, "end": 313, "text": "Gunji and Sondheimer", "ref_id": null } ], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Notes 1 There are certainly important interactions with empirial semantic work done in the last 10 years, soOrtony and Wilks stress the pervasive influence of Fillmore. Like any other systematic distinction the one between formal llnguistic semantics and AI-semantics is somewhat simplifying: Within AI there are semantic approaches which are more or less oriented at formal logic, so the one of McCarthy, Creary or Nash-Webber and Reiter and others. As typical AI-semantic approaches we regard the ones of Schank and his colleagues, Wi\u00b1ks or Charniak (cf. for instance the articles in Charniak and Wilks).", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "2 Hayes, 9 3 Slightly exaggerating this tendency is formulated by Schank in Schank et al.) :\"Researchers in NPL (natural language processing in AI) have become less and less concerned with language issues per se. We are more interested in inferencing and memory models for example.\" (p. 1OO8)", "cite_spans": [ { "start": 2, "end": 8, "text": "Hayes,", "ref_id": null }, { "start": 9, "end": 10, "text": "9", "ref_id": null }, { "start": 66, "end": 90, "text": "Schank in Schank et al.)", "ref_id": null } ], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "4 Such systems are presented for instance in Riesbeck, Norman and Rumelhart, and even more programmatically in Schank et al., DeJong. Also in systems conceived as data base interfaces like LIFER (Hendrix) and PLANES ~altz) \"semantic\"grammars are used. A theoretical discussion on the role of syntax can be found in Schank et al. 5 I.e. one has to check, whether in systems containlng only \"part grammars\" or working with a syntactic \"pre-processing\" the syntactic rules which were effectively used, can be combined resulting in a coherent and consistent grammar. Questions of syntactic-semantic and purely semantic grammars underlying parsers are also discussed from a theoretical point of view in Wahlster.", "cite_spans": [ { "start": 195, "end": 204, "text": "(Hendrix)", "ref_id": null }, { "start": 315, "end": 330, "text": "Schank et al. 5", "ref_id": null } ], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The system PLIDIS is described in Kolvenbach, L6tscher and Lutz.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "The language KS (\"Konstruktsprache\") is described in Zifonun.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Cresswell gives an analogous categorial description for verbs. Like in this minimal grammar in applying the rule of concatenation phenomena of word order are neglected.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "Keenan and Faltz introduce the category of \"function noun\" (in our framework O-N/NP) 10 The vague condition of \"systematically admitting\" is made concrete in PLIDIS by prescribing a semantic\"sort\" for each argument of a predicate.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null }, { "text": "ii This reduction is done in PLIDIS with the help of meaning postulates which are interpreted by a theorem prover.", "cite_spans": [], "ref_spans": [], "eq_spans": [], "section": "Comparison with other approaches", "sec_num": null } ], "back_matter": [], "bib_entries": { "BIBREF0": { "ref_id": "b0", "title": "Natural Language Question Answering Systems", "authors": [ { "first": "W", "middle": [ "J H J" ], "last": "Bronnenberg", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "H", "middle": [ "C" ], "last": "Bunt", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "S", "middle": [ "P J" ], "last": "Landsbergen", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "R", "middle": [ "J H" ], "last": "Scha", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "W", "middle": [ "J" ], "last": "Schoenmakers", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "E", "middle": [ "P C" ], "last": "Van Utteren", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1980, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "217--305", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Bronnenberg, W.J.H.J./Bunt, H.C./Lands- bergen, S.P.J./Scha, R.J.H./Schoen- makers, W.J./van Utteren, E.P.C.:\"The Question Answering System PHLIQAi\", in: L. Bolc (ed.) \"Natural Language Question Answering Systems\" (Natural Communication with Computers), Mac- millan, London 1980, 217-305.", "links": null }, "BIBREF1": { "ref_id": "b1", "title": "Computational Semantics", "authors": [], "year": 1976, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Charniak, E./Wilks, Y. (eds.): \"Computa- tional Semantics\", ~ed. North Holland, Amsterdam 1976.", "links": null }, "BIBREF2": { "ref_id": "b2", "title": "Propositional Attitudes: Fregean Representation and Simulative Reasoning", "authors": [ { "first": "L", "middle": [ "G" ], "last": "Creary", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "76--182", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Creary, L.G.: \"Propositional Attitudes: Fregean Representation and Simulative Reasoning\", Proc. 0th IdCAI Tokyo 1979, ~76-182.", "links": null }, "BIBREF3": { "ref_id": "b3", "title": "Logics and Languages", "authors": [ { "first": "M", "middle": [ "J" ], "last": "Cresswell", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1973, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Cresswell, M.J.: \"Logics and Languages\", Methuen, London 1973.", "links": null }, "BIBREF4": { "ref_id": "b4", "title": "Predictional Substantiation: Two Processes that Comprise Understanding", "authors": [ { "first": "G", "middle": [], "last": "Dejong", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "Proc. 6th IdCAI", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "217--222", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "DeJong, G.: \"Predictional Substantiation: Two Processes that Comprise Under- standing\", Proc. 6th IdCAI Tokyo 1979, 217-222.", "links": null }, "BIBREF5": { "ref_id": "b5", "title": "Explicit Finite Intensional Models for PTQ and An Interpretation System for Montague Grammar", "authors": [ { "first": "J", "middle": [], "last": "Friedman", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "D", "middle": [ "B" ], "last": "Moran", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "D", "middle": [ "S" ], "last": "Warren", "suffix": "" } ], "year": null, "venue": "American Journal of Computational Linguistics Microfiche", "volume": "74", "issue": "", "pages": "1978--1981", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Friedman, J./Moran, D.B./Warren, D.S.: \"Explicit Finite Intensional Models for PTQ and An Interpretation System for Montague Grammar\", American Jour- nal of Computational Linguistics Mi- crofiche 74, 1978~ 3-96.", "links": null }, "BIBREF6": { "ref_id": "b6", "title": "The Mutual Relevance of Model-Theoretic Semantics and Artificial Intelligence\", unpubl. paper, Department of Computer and Information Science The Ohio State University", "authors": [ { "first": "T", "middle": [], "last": "Gunji", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "N", "middle": [], "last": "Sondheimer", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Gunji, T./Sondheimer, N.: \"The Mutual Re- levance of Model-Theoretic Semantics and Artificial Intelligence\", unpubl. paper, Department of Computer and In- formation Science The Ohio State Uni- versity, February 1979.", "links": null }, "BIBREF7": { "ref_id": "b7", "title": "On the Difference between Psychology and Artificial Intelligence", "authors": [ { "first": "P", "middle": [], "last": "Hayes", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "8--9", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Hayes, P.: \"On the Difference between Psychology and Artificial Intelli- gence\", AISB quarterly 34 July 1979, 8-9.", "links": null }, "BIBREF8": { "ref_id": "b8", "title": "LIFER: A Natural Language Interface Facility", "authors": [ { "first": "G", "middle": [ "G" ], "last": "Hendrix", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1976, "venue": "Tech. Note", "volume": "135", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Hendrix, G.G.: \"LIFER: A Natural Lan- guage Interface Facility\", Tech. Note 135, AI Center Stanford Research Inst., Menlo Park, California 1976.", "links": null }, "BIBREF9": { "ref_id": "b9", "title": "Making Computational Sense of Montague's Intensional Logic", "authors": [ { "first": "J", "middle": [ "R" ], "last": "Hobbs", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "S", "middle": [ "J" ], "last": "Rosenschein", "suffix": "" } ], "year": null, "venue": "Artificial Intelligence", "volume": "9", "issue": "", "pages": "287--306", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Hobbs, J.R./Rosenschein, S.J.: \"Making Computational Sense of Montague's In- tensional Logic\", Artificial Intelli- gence 9, ]978, 287-306.", "links": null }, "BIBREF10": { "ref_id": "b10", "title": "Logical Types for Natural Language", "authors": [ { "first": "E", "middle": [], "last": "Keenan", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "L", "middle": [ "M" ], "last": "Faltz", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1978, "venue": "", "volume": "3", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Keenan, E./Faltz, L.M.: \"Logical Types for Natural Language\", UCLA Occasio- nal Papers in Linguistics 3, Fall 1978.", "links": null }, "BIBREF11": { "ref_id": "b11", "title": "KOnstliche Intelligenz und natfirliche Sprache. Sprachverstehen und Probleml6sen mit dem Computer", "authors": [], "year": 1979, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Kolvenbach, M./L6tscher, A./Lutz, H. (eds.): \"KOnstliche Intelligenz und natfirliche Sprache. Sprachverstehen und Probleml6sen mit dem Computer\", Narr, Tfibingen 1979.", "links": null }, "BIBREF12": { "ref_id": "b12", "title": "First Order Theories of Individual Concepts and Propositions", "authors": [ { "first": "J", "middle": [], "last": "Mccarthy", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "Machine Intelligence 9", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "McCarthy, J.: \"First Order Theories of Individual Concepts and Propositions\", in:D. Michie (ed.) Machine Intelli- gence 9, Edinburgh 1979.", "links": null }, "BIBREF13": { "ref_id": "b13", "title": "Formal Philosophy", "authors": [ { "first": "R", "middle": [], "last": "Montague", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1974, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Montague, R.: \"Formal Philosophy\", ed. by R. Thomason, Yale University Press, New Haven and London 1974.", "links": null }, "BIBREF14": { "ref_id": "b14", "title": "Anaphora and Logical Form: On Formal Representations for Natural Language", "authors": [ { "first": "B", "middle": [], "last": "Nash-Webber", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "R", "middle": [], "last": "Reiter", "suffix": "" } ], "year": null, "venue": "Proc.5th", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Nash-Webber, B./Reiter, R.: \"Anaphora and Logical Form: On Formal Representa- tions for Natural Language\", Proc.5th", "links": null }, "BIBREF16": { "ref_id": "b16", "title": "Explorations in Cognition", "authors": [], "year": 1975, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Norman, D.A./Rumelhart, D.E. (eds.): \"Ex- plorations in Cognition\", Freeman, San Francisco 1975.", "links": null }, "BIBREF17": { "ref_id": "b17", "title": "Cognitive Science versus Artificial Intelligence", "authors": [ { "first": "A", "middle": [], "last": "Ortony", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "Y", "middle": [], "last": "Wilks", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "", "volume": "34", "issue": "", "pages": "20--22", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Ortony, A./Wilks, Y.: \"Cognitive Science versus Artificial Intelligence\", AISB quarterly 34, April 1979, 20-22.", "links": null }, "BIBREF18": { "ref_id": "b18", "title": "Conceptual Information Processing", "authors": [ { "first": "C", "middle": [ "K" ], "last": "Riesbeck", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1975, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "83--156", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Riesbeck, C.K.: \"Conceptual Analysis\", in: R.C. Schank (ed.) \"Conceptual Information Processing\", North Hol- land, Amsterdam 1975, 83-156.", "links": null }, "BIBREF19": { "ref_id": "b19", "title": "Parsing directly into Knowledge Structures", "authors": [ { "first": "R", "middle": [ "C" ], "last": "Schank", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "M", "middle": [], "last": "Lebowitz", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "L", "middle": [], "last": "Birnbaum", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "Proc. 6th IJCAI", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "772--777", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Schank, R.C./Lebowitz, M./Birnbaum, L.: \"Parsing directly into Knowledge Structures\", Proc. 6th IJCAI Tokyo 1979, 772-777.", "links": null }, "BIBREF20": { "ref_id": "b20", "title": "Panel on Natural Language Processing", "authors": [ { "first": "R", "middle": [ "C" ], "last": "Schank", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1977, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "1007--1013", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Schank, R.C. et al.: \"Panel on Natural Language Processing\",Proc. 5th IJCAI Cambridge Mass. 1977, 1007-1013.", "links": null }, "BIBREF21": { "ref_id": "b21", "title": "Applying Model-Theoretic Semantics to Natural Language Understanding: Representation and Question Answering", "authors": [ { "first": "N", "middle": [ "K" ], "last": "Sondheimer", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "T", "middle": [], "last": "Gunji", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1978, "venue": "Proc. 7th COLING", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Sondheimer, N.K./Gunji, T.: \"Applying Model-Theoretic Semantics to Natural Language Understanding: Representa- tion and Question Answering\", Proc. 7th COLING Bergen 1978.", "links": null }, "BIBREF22": { "ref_id": "b22", "title": "Computational Lxplication of Intensionality", "authors": [ { "first": "", "middle": [], "last": "St", "suffix": "" }, { "first": "J", "middle": [], "last": "Bien", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1976, "venue": "Preprints 6th COLING Ottawa", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "St. Bien, J.: \"Computational Lxplication of Intensionality\", Preprints 6th COLING Ottawa 1976.", "links": null }, "BIBREF23": { "ref_id": "b23", "title": "Augmented Transition Network Grammatiken", "authors": [ { "first": "W", "middle": [], "last": "Wahlster", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1979, "venue": "ATN und semantisch-pragmatische Analysesteuerung", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "167--185", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Wahlster, W.: \"ATN und semantisch-pragma- tische Analysesteuerung, in: T. Christal- ler/D. Metzing (ed.) \"Augmented Tran- sition Network Grammatiken\", vol I, Einhorn, Berlin 1979, 167-185.", "links": null }, "BIBREF24": { "ref_id": "b24", "title": "An English Language Question Answering System for a Large Relational Database", "authors": [ { "first": "D", "middle": [ "L" ], "last": "Waltz", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1978, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Waltz, D.L.: \"An English Language Ques- tion Answering System for a Large Re- lational Database\", CACM 21.7, July 1978.", "links": null }, "BIBREF25": { "ref_id": "b25", "title": "Philosophy of Language", "authors": [ { "first": "Y", "middle": [], "last": "Wilks", "suffix": "" } ], "year": 1976, "venue": "Computational Semantics, 2ed. North Holland", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "205--233", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Wilks, Y.: \"Philosophy of Language\", in: E. Charniak, Y. Wilks (eds.) Computa- tional Semantics, 2ed. North Holland, Amsterdam 1976, 205-233.", "links": null }, "BIBREF26": { "ref_id": "b26", "title": "Kfinstliche Intelligenz und natOrliche Sprache. Sprachverstehen und Problem-lSsen mit dem Computer, Narr, T~ibin-gen 1979", "authors": [ { "first": "G", "middle": [], "last": "Zifonun", "suffix": "" } ], "year": null, "venue": "", "volume": "", "issue": "", "pages": "93--134", "other_ids": {}, "num": null, "urls": [], "raw_text": "Zifonun, G.: \"Formale Repr~isentation na- tOrlichsprachlicher ~uBerungen\", in: Kolvenbach, L6tscher, Lutz (eds.), Kfinstliche Intelligenz und natOrliche Sprache. Sprachverstehen und Problem- lSsen mit dem Computer, Narr, T~ibin- gen 1979, 93-134.", "links": null } }, "ref_entries": { "FIGREF0": { "text": "(l.l.) Given the categories of a categorial grammar of NL, f is mapping from these categories on the syntactic categories of KS. I.e. If m, ~I, ..., ~n are basic categories of German, then f(~), f (~I),..., f(#n) are syntactic categories of K$. If ~/~I/.../~n is a derived category (functor category) of NL, then f(~)/f(~1)/.../ f(~n) is a derived category of KS.(1.2.) If a is-an expression of category 6 in NL (a6), then f(a) is an expression of category f(6) in KS (f(a)f(6)).", "type_str": "figure", "uris": null, "num": null }, "FIGREF1": { "text": "(1.3.) The concatenation of an expression of the derived category m/~I/.../ #nwithexpressions of category ~1,...,#nresulting in an expression of category ~/#I/.../~n ~ ~I ~ ... ~ Fn ~ is rendered in KS by the construction of a list [f~/~/.../~n) Z(~)...#(Fn)]with the category ~'(~)(concatenation and list construction are defined for categories instead of expressions in order to zmprove readability).Thus the 'transduction grammar' NL-KS is the triple < GNL, GKS, ~ >We now specify a minimal categoria[ grammar of German GNL. A particular of GNL is the analysis of verbs as m-ary predicates, i.e. in the categorial frame-worK, as functions from m NP into S 8 and the analogue treatment of nouns as functot categories 9 taking their attributes as arguments", "type_str": "figure", "uris": null, "num": null }, "FIGREF2": { "text": "syntactic and lexical rules we can generate the following level I representations of two natural language sentences: ENTHALT~AEO stel 2 [IOTA [LAMBDA \u00d7[PROBe ~-L] x]] TERM ASITER~ ]FORMEL (received different representations on level I, they are nevertheless synonymous at least as far as the context of information seeking is concerned.", "type_str": "figure", "uris": null, "num": null } } } }